In negotiations regarding the Convention, China and the Group of 77 actively
safeguarded the overall interests of developing countries and required developed
countries to assume primary responsibility for addressing climate change and
providing developing countries with support concerning funds and the transfer of
technology. The EU and its member states advocated conclusion of a framework
convention with specific commitments for keeping carbon dioxide emission in 2000
at the level of 1990. For this purpose, the EU coordinated differences in opinions
with the USA on the one hand and sought support from other developed countries
on the other hand. At that time, China and the EU placed emphasis on their own
national and group affairs, thus interaction between the two sides was less
prominent.
9.3.2 The Stage of the Protocol Negotiation and Entry
into Force in the Years 1995–2004: Open Cooperation
The EU and the USA obviously had different stands regarding mechanism design in
the Protocol at the Protocol negotiation stage. China’s and the EU’s stands shared
many similarities, and interaction between the two sides emerged.
On the issue concerning the determination of emission reduction targets, China
and the Group of 77 required developed countries to continue reducing carbon
dioxide emissions after 2000 and insisted that it must not be required for developing
countries to undertake any obligation within a certain period of time. The group of
developed countries represented by the EU believed that legally-binding quantified
emission reduction targets should be further clarified on the basis of the
Convention, and undertook to not incorporate into the Protocol negotiation agenda
the requirement that developing countries should make emission reduction com-
mitments. The USA opposed the establishment of emission reduction targets and a
time schedule, but later the USA shifted to consider medium-term targets on the
premise of requiring developing countries to take actions to restrict emissions.
Concerning theflexible mechanism issue, China and the Group of 77 advocated a
strict definition of the range of application and the extent of utilization to prevent
deviation from the“Common but Differentiated Responsibilities”in operations of
flexible mechanisms (see Footnote 21). The EU also emphasized that there was a
supplement from the“flexible mechanism”and it should not cause harm to efforts
of various countries in preferentially taking domestic emission reduction actions to
achieve emission reduction targets. Although China and the EU had different
considerations and interests, their stands on requiring developed countries to
become thefirst to reduce emissions, strictly restricting use of the“flexible
mechanism”and not requiring developing countries to make“voluntary commit-
ments”were roughly the same.
178 F. Cong